Microsoft Asks WTO Not to Impose Software Tariffs

Element5 writes "In an interesting story featured on Netscape's Netcenter Tech News, Microsoft is apparently trying to keep the WTO from imposing a duty fee for international online transactions."

Comments

Do you people have any idea what this means?

[evilad]

I am in favour of a global economy, but a moratorium on tariffs means one more nail in the coffin of governmental control over the hypercorps. Microsoft isn't asking that governments work towards eliminating unreasonable barriers to international trade. They are asking that elected governments be categorically forced to allow unrestricted trade. They are lobbying for an overruling of the democratic principle in this one specific case that happens to strongly favour -- you got it, the hypercorps.

This is precisely what makes it possible for third-world wage-slavery to exist. This is what makes it possible for unnamed chemical companies to dump as much shit as they want into the water, so long as they do it in countries too poor to say no to the business. Odd how those same countries also tend to be too poor to buy their products, too.

Here is an example of why tariffs can be good. Canada can't impose strict environmental protection laws, because to do so would be to force some companies to produce in Mexico, which cannot afford strong environment laws for exactly the same reason. Canada loses the business, Mexico's environment gets polluted. Canada is then prohibited from imposing an "environmental tariff" on those same goods. That tariff would keep the company in Canada, locally producing goods for local consumption. If the locals think the pollution is too bad to justify the product, then they get to legislate it out of existence. That is what government is for.

An electronic transaction is no different than a phone call. If there is no good reason for import restrictions then let free market do as it will! But when there is a good reason, then somebody should make it clear that I am doing the world a disservice by purchasing that product.

A tariff will do this perfectly well, without prohibiting a damned thing.

This has been an unsponsored and uneducated rant. Flame away.

Taxes? from where to where?

[DaveHowe]

I can't see how you could possibly keep track - for example, say bigsoftwarecorp.com sells a copy of superware V3 (tm) to an aol user at aol .com. ALL the following could be true:

1. bigsoftwarecorp.com is in the .com domain
2. bigsoftwarecorp.com's host is in New Zealand
3. bigsoftwarecorp.com has a download server in england that the software actually comes from (download.bigsoftware.com)
4. bigsoftwarecorp.com is actually an english company
5. john@aol.com is in the .com domain
6. john@aol.com registered in japan
7. john@aol.com is actually in england, and will be downloading and using the software there. so, which of the countries are entitled to duty? we are downloading from england to england, but the data is going to AOL's US server enroute...
   --

MS is leading you into a trap!

[cpt kangarooski]

This is _important_. MS is once again on the WRONG SIDE here. While what they propose seems to be a good idea to many of us here (who are fed up with governmental interference with the net), things would be much, much worse if MS succeeds.

The WTO has an abominable amount of power. Far too much, IMHO. Though it is not their original purpose, they basically exist now to overturn the sovereignty of the various (many) nations which are members in favor of international corporations.

If the WTO rules that US antitrust law, for instance, somehow harmed international trade and was in violation of the treaty, the US would have _no option_ but to revoke the law and submit to the WTO.

The WTO is a jillion times worse than our governments, because at least we have some hope of changing the way that our governments work. We have no such hope wrt the WTO; they serve the best intrests of real people in name but not in deed.

Sure it sucks to have trade regulations on the net. But did you support embargoes as protests against apartheid? Human rights violations? Environmental, health and safety concerns? Not only could a moritorium prevent cessession of trade with nations which had such practices or harmful effects on the planet or even yourself, but they have already done so in the past.

If you don't like the behavior of your government, fine. But for God's sake, wouldn't you rather have YOUR government listen to you and not to some faceless corporation-serving committee.

So let's not only encourage the WTO to take no action whatsoever, but encourage it's dissolution or at least an extreme change to a body which is founded on not just money but ethics as well.